We are here considering two somewhat similar cars, but we can't deny some of the obvious differences. For a start, they are not even classified under the same segment, with the Zastava being a city car and the Seat representing micro car vehicle class. The first one has a FIAT-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 67hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 100hp engine designed by Volkswagen.

Unfortunatelly, neither of the two vehicles was submitted to the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) testing. This makes it virtually impossible for me to pick one over the other and I'm generally against buying such cars as the safety should really always come first. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. The first vehicle is a city car and that gives it a marginal advantage over the micro car competitor, at least that's what statistics show. On the other hand, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Spanish car offers a marginal difference of 7% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Zastava with an average rating of 3.4, and models under the Seat badge with 4.4 out of 5. The same official information place Yugo Koral In as average reliability-wise, and Arosa is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Serbian car rank it on average as 1.8, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 2.7 out of 5.

Seat is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 3.8 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 188 kilometers per hour, 33km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy an obvious choice would be the Serbian car, averaging around 0 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (INF mpg), in combined cycle. That's INF% difference compared to the Spanish car!

Seat appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In this case though, it seems that both cars show similar levels of passenger protection all together, so that won't break a tie. But one thing that actually could is the performance, with Seat outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Zastava. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.